Madras High Court
Sathish vs Seetha on 23 August, 2023
C.R.P(MD)No.1610 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 23.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN
THILAKAVADI
C.R.P(MD)No.1610 of 2023
and
C.M.P(MD)No.7886 of 2023
Sathish ... Petitioner/Respondent/
Petitioner
Vs.
Seetha ... Respondent/Petitioner/
Respondent
Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India, to set aside the order dated 10.03.2023 passed by the Principal
Sub-Court, Pudukottai, in I.A.No.214 of 2021 in H.M.O.P.No.60 of 2020.
For Petitioner :Mr.T.Lenin Kumar
For Respondent :No appearance
ORDER
This civil revision petition is filed against the order dated 10.03.2023
passed in I.A.No.214 of 2021 in H.M.O.P.No.60 of 2020 by the Principal
Sub-Court, Pudukottai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1610 of 2023
2.According to the revision petitioner/defendant, the marriage
between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 26.06.2013.
Due to some matrimonial dispute, the petitioner/husband filed a petition in
H.M.O.P.No.174 of 2017 before the Sub-Court, Trichy, for divorce.
Thereafter, the said petition was transferred to Sub-Court, Lalgudi and
renumbered as H.M.O.P.No.188 of 2018. Pursuant to which, the
respondent/wife filed Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.505 of 2019, seeking transfer the
H.M.O.P from the Sub-Court, Lalgudi to the Sub-Court, Pudukottai. The
said Tr.C.M.P, was ordered and the H.M.O.P was transferred from Sub-
Court, Lalgudi to the Sub-Court, Pudukottai. Further, there was a direction
to dispose the divorce petition within a period of six months from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the said petition was
renumbered as H.M.O.P.No.60 of 2020 on the file of the Principal Sub-
Court, Pudukottai. In such circumstances, the respondent/wife filed an
application in M.C.No.6 of 2022 before the District Munsif cum Judicial
Magistrate, Thirumayam, for maintenance. Again, the petitioner/husband
filed transfer petition in Tr.C.M.P.No.129 of 2023 before the Principal
District and Sessions Judge, Pudukottai, to transfer the maintenance case
from the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam to
any other Judicial Magistrate Court in Pudukottai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1610 of 2023
3.While so, on 12.01.2023, when the transfer petition came up for
hearing, the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Pudukottai,
decided the maintenance petition and awarded a sum of Rs.7,000/- as
maintenance to the respondent and her children. Again, the respondent/wife
filed two separate applications in I.A.Nos.213 and 214 of 2021 in
H.M.O.P.No.60 of 2020 seeking for litigation expenses of Rs.1,00,000/- and
for interim maintenance of Rs.20,000/-. The learned Principal Sub Judge,
Pudukottai, without considering the earlier order passed in the maintenance
petition, awarded maintenance of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent on
10.03.2023. Aggrieved by which, the present civil revision petition is filed.
4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused
the materials available on record.
5.On perusal of the records and the orders passed by the Court below
and upon considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, it is seen that the learned Principal Sub-Judge, Pudukottai, while
passing the order of maintenance in the applications filed by the
respondent/wife, ought to have considered the previous order passed by the
learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Pudukottai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1610 of 2023
6.The judgment referred to by the learned counsel appearing for the
revision petitioner is squarely applicable to the present case. The Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case reported in 2021(2)SCC 324, wherein it was held
that:
“(a)Issue of overlapping jurisdiction
128.To overcome the issue of overlapping
jurisdiction, and avoid conflicting orders being passed in
different proceedings, it has become necessary to issue
directions in this regard, so that there is uniformity in the
practice followed by the Family Courts/District
Courts/Magistrate Courts throughout the Country. We direct
that:
128.1.(1)Where successive claims for maintenance are
made by a party under different statutes, the Court would
consider an adjustment or set-off, of the amount awarded in the
previous proceeding(s), while determining whether any further
amount is to be awarded in the subsequent proceeding.
128.2(ii) It is made mandatory for the applicant to
disclose the previous proceeding and the orders passed therein,
in the subsequence proceeding.
128.3(iii) If the order passed in the previous proceeding(s)
required any modification or variation, it would be required to
be done in the same proceeding.”
Therefore, the respondent/wife ought to have disclosed the previous
proceedings and the order passed therein in subsequent proceedings and
ought to have approached the court which had already passed an order in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1610 of 2023
respect of maintenance, if required for any modification or variation.
Without adopting such procedure, the respondent/wife has filed another
application for maintenance, which is an abuse of process of law.
7.According to the revision petitioner, the said amount of Rs.7,000/-
was fixed by the trial Court only with the consent of the parties, the
respondent/wife agreed to get a sum of Rs.7,000/- as maintenance in the
proceedings on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge,
Pudukottai. Moreover, it is also brought to the knowledge of this Court that
without an affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities as per the
guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the learned Principal Subordinate
Judge, Pudukottai, has awarded the maintenance amount, which is in
violation of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the
aforesaid case.
8.Considering the above facts, the order dated 10.03.2023 passed in
I.A.No.214 of 2021 in H.M.O.P.No.60 of 2020 by the learned Principal Sub
Judge, Pudukottai, is hereby set aside and the petitioner is directed to
continue to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) as interim
maintenance, awarded by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,
Pudukottai, which is subsequently enhanced by this Court vide order dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1610 of 2023
10.07.2023. The petitioner shall continue to pay the maintenance amount of
Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondents on or before 0th day of every
succeeding English Calender Month, without fail.
9.With the above directions, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
23.08.2023
NCC:Yes/No
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
To
1.The Principal District and
Sessions Judge,
Pudukottai.
2.The Principal Sub Judge,
Pudukottai,
3.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1610 of 2023
K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.
Ns
C.R.P(MD)No.1610 of 2023
and
C.M.P(MD)No.7886 of 2023
23.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
